They try to justify murder

Proverbs 14:12 and
16:25 warn us: “There is a way that seems right
to a man, but its end is the way of death.” In
his “Life of Lycurgus”, the Greek historian Plutarch
(48-122 A.D.) records that in Sparta in ancient
Greece, the Spartan elders examined all newborn babies
and ordered that any who were not well-built and
sturdy were to be killed by leaving them in the bush
at the foot of Mount Taygetus:
[1]“Offspring
was not reared at the will of the father, but was
taken and carried by him to a place called Lesche,
where the elders of the tribes officially examined the
infant, and if it was well-built and sturdy, they
ordered the father to rear it, and assigned it one of
the nine thousand lots of land; but if it was ill-born
and deformed, they sent it to the so-called Apothetae,
a chasm-like place at the foot of Mount Taygetus, in
the conviction that the life of that which nature had
not well equipped at the very beginning for health and
strength, was of no advantage either to itself or the
state.” Such
new-borns starved or froze to death or were eaten by
wild animals.
[2]

Note that Plutarch
said that the elders of the Spartan tribes had the
right to decide which baby lived and which was killed.
Also Plutarch records that Lycurgus adopted the
philosophy that any baby which was not very healthy
and strong was no advantage to itself or to the state.
This is the same type of utilitarian and
ends-justifies-the-means reasoning which Adolf Hitler
and his Nazi criminals used in Germany in the late
1930’s and early 1940’s in relation to murdering
newborn children with deformities.

The Greek historian
Herodotus (approximately 484-424 B.C.) records that
the King of Medes ordered a newborn baby be killed:
“The herdsmen made haste to answer the
summons, and Harpagus said to him: ‘The king’s orders
are that you must expose this infant in the wildest
spot you know of amongst the hills, where it may
soonest die.’”
[3] Here we see that the
Medes’ practice of murdering newborn babies involved
similar methods to that used by the pagan Greeks and
Romans – abandoning the babies on hills or mountains.
The Medes and Persians had a powerful empire and
conquered Babylon in the time of the prophet Daniel
(see Daniel 5:28, 5:31-6:9 and 8:20). The Book of
Esther refers to the Medes and Persians also.

Ancient Greeks finding excuses to murder newborn
babies

In his writing “Theaetetus”,
the Greek philosopher Plato quoted Socrates saying
that children with any defects should be killed:
“For we must take care that we don’t
overlook some defect in this thing that is
entering into life; it may be something not worth
bringing up, a wind-egg, a falsehood. What do you say?
Is it your opinion that your child ought in any case
to be brought up and not exposed to die? Can
you bear to see it found fault with and not get into a
rage if your first-born is stolen away from you?”
[4]

Socrates argues here
that we should murder newborn babies with any physical
defects so they can avoid other people finding fault
with them.

In his play “Ion”, the
ancient Greek dramatist Euripides (485-406 B.C.) had
his main female character named Kreusa (Kre) discuss
with her female slave known as Old Servant (O.S.) the
fact that Kreusa exposed her unwanted baby to death.
Kreusa was Queen of Athens and the wife of Xuthus, the
king-consort of Athens. Euripides’ words illustrate
another excuse ancient Greeks used to murder their
unwanted new-borns:

O.S. And how didst thou conceal Apollo’s rape?

Kre. I travailed – bear to hear my tale, old
friend!

O.S. Who tended thee?…alone in trial’s hour!

Kre. Alone within the cave that saw my rape.

O.S. And the boy, where? – that thou no more be
childless.

Kre. Dead is he, ancient – unto beasts cast out.

O.S. Dead? – and Apollo, traitor! helped thee
nought?

Kre. Helped not. The child is nursed in Hades’
halls.

O.S. Who cast him forth? – Not thou – O never thou!

Kre. Even I. My vesture darkling swaddled him.

O.S. Nor any knew the exposing of the child?

Kre. None – Misery and Secrecy alone.

O.S. How couldst thou leave thy babe within the
cave?

Kre. Ah how? – O pitiful farewells I moaned!

O.S. Poor heart of steel! – O God’s heart harder
yet!

Kre. Ah, hadst thou seen the babe’s hands stretched
to me!

O.S. Seeking the breast, or cradle of thine arms?

Kre. Where he lay not, and so had wrong of me.

O.S. And in what hope didst thou cast forth the
babe?

Kre. That the God yet would save him – his own
child.

Note that Kreusa tried
to justify her wicked murder by saying she hoped God
would save the child from death. She called the child
“his own child”,
meaning God owned the child and therefore was
primarily responsible if it lived or died. But she
ignored the fact that God had put the child in her
delegated care and she was therefore guilty of murder
if the child died as a result of its exposure in the
bush.

In his play “The
Arbitration”, the Greek dramatist Menander (343-293
B.C.) had one of his main characters, the slave
Onesimos say the following about Onesimos’ master
raping a girl: “He lost this ring last year
at the Tauropolia – An all-night song-and-dance for
women. It’s pretty clear what happened was, a girl got
raped, and had this child; and then, of course,
exposed it.”
[5]

Note Onesimos said
that “…a girl got raped, and had this child;
and then, of course, exposed it.”
By using the words “of course”,
he was saying that it was normal in Athens and/or
Greece at that time to murder any newborn babies which
were the result of rape.

In modern times, many
insist that babies produced by rape should be
considered for abortion. The ancient Athenians and/or
Greeks in Menander’s time believed that babies who
were the result of rape should be left to die out in
the bush. Modern supporters of abortions in rape cases
and the ancient Athenians and/or Greeks probably used
similar ends-justifies-the-means arguments to support
such killings of innocent children. They believed the
philosophy that two wrongs make a right.

In ancient Greece,
some females aborted their own unwanted babies. In his
“Sayings of Spartan Women”, the Greek biographer
Plutarch (48-122 A.D.) wrote about a girl in ancient
Sparta in Greece: “A girl had secret
relations with a man, and, after bringing on an
abortion…”
[6]

In the 200’s B.C., the
Greek poet Posidippus wrote, “Everybody
raises a son even if he is poor, but exposes a
daughter even if he is rich.”
[7] Posidippus indicates
that many wealthy and poorer Greeks murdered their
newborn daughters. This was partly due to the ancient
pagan Greek attitude that females were very inferior
to males.

Greek attitudes to marriage and
infanticide in the 100’s B.C.

The ancient Greek
historian Polybius (approx. 200-118 B.C.) traveled
extensively throughout Greece during his era and wrote
about what happened just before Greece declined and
was conquered by Rome: “In our times the
whole of Greece has suffered a shortage of children
and hence a general decrease of the population,
and in consequence some cities have become deserted
and agricultural production has declined, although
neither wars nor epidemics were taking place
continuously. Now if anyone had proposed that we
should consult the gods to find out what we should say
or do as to increase our numbers and repopulate our
cities, his advice would have been considered quite
futile, since the cause of this situation was
self-evident and the remedy lay within our own power.
This evil grew upon us rapidly and overtook us
before we were aware of it, the simple reason being
that men had fallen prey to inflated ambitions, love
of money and indolence, with the result that they were
unwilling to marry, or if they did marry, to bring up
the children that were born to them; or else they
would only rear one or two out of a large number,
so as to leave these well off and able in turn to
squander their inheritance. For in cases where there
are only one or two children and one is killed off by
war and the other by sickness, it is obvious that the
family home is left unoccupied, and ultimately, just
as happens with swarms of bees, little by little whole
cities lose their resources and cease to flourish.”
[8]

The above shows how
common abortion and murdering unwanted children after
birth became in Greece before its fall to Rome.

Soranus – the famous gynecologist, obstetrician
and mass murderer

Soranus of Ephesus
(lived late 1st and early 2nd
centuries A.D.) was one of the most famous Greek
medical doctors in the ancient Roman world. He was a
physician, gynecologist and obstetrician who assisted
female midwives at difficult labours.

Soranus’ book
“Gynecology” was very popular among other medical
physicians in the Roman Empire in following centuries.
In one section of this book, he gave instructions
about how to determine whether to kill newborn
children: “vi (xxvi). How to Recognize
the Newborn That Is Worth Rearing

10 (79). Now the midwife, having received the
newborn, should first put it upon the earth, having
examined beforehand whether the infant is male or
female, and should make an announcement by signs as is
the custom of women. She should also consider whether
it is worth rearing or not. And the infant which is
suited by nature for rearing will be distinguished by
the fact that its mother has spent the period of
pregnancy in good health, for conditions which require
medical care, especially those of the body, also harm
the fetus and enfeeble the foundations of its life.
Second, by the fact that it has been born at the due
time, best at the end of nine months, and if it so
happens, later; but also after only seven months.
Furthermore by the fact that when put on the earth it
immediately cries with proper vigor. For one that
lives for some length of time without crying, or cries
but weakly, is suspected of behaving so on account of
some unfavorable condition. Also by the fact that it
is perfect in all its parts, members and senses; that
its ducts, namely of the ears, nose, pharynx, urethra,
anus are free from obstruction; that the natural
functions of every <member> are neither sluggish nor
weak; that the joints bend and stretch; that it has
due size and shape and is properly sensitive in every
respect. This we may recognize from pressing the
fingers against the surface of the body, for it is
natural to suffer pain from everything that pricks or
squeezes. And by conditions contrary to those
mentioned, the infant not worth rearing is
recognized.”
[9]

Murdering newborns through
drowning or exposure to cold, hunger or animals

In his writing “Ad
Nationes”, Tertullian (approx. 155-220 A.D.) records
how many pagans in the Roman Empire in the late 100’s
and early 200’s A.D. used to murder their newborn
children: “…because, although you are
forbidden by the laws to slay new-born infants, it so
happens that no laws are evaded with more impunity or
greater safety, with the deliberate knowledge of the
public, and the suffrages of this entire age…But then
you make away with them in a more cruel manner,
because you expose them to the cold and hunger, and to
wild beasts, or else you get rid of them by the slower
death of drowning.”
[10]

Tertullian states that
at the time, the Romans had laws against killing
newborn children but that no offenders were ever
prosecuted even though the identities of these
murderers were well known to the general public.

Roman women caring more for their birds than their
newborn babies

In his Book 3 of his
writing “Instructor”, Clement of Alexandria (approx.
150-215 A.D.) wrote how many Roman women at his time
cared more about birds than they did their own newborn
babies. They murdered their newborns but looked after
their parrots and curlews well: “And though
maintaining parrots and curlews, they do not receive
the orphan child; but they expose children that are
born at home, and take up the young of birds, and
prefer irrational to rational creatures.”
[11] Curlews were
long-billed wading birds.

These ancient women
were similar to those today who abort their unwanted
babies or permit hospitals to starve their newborn
babies with disabilities to death but then protest
against the killing of wild birds and whales.

God wants us to care
for birds, whales and the natural environment He has
created. But He hates the wicked ancient and modern
practice in which people value animals, fish and trees
more than babies.

Roman
“tolerance” about infanticide and sex with child
prostitutes

Clement of Alexandria also records that numerous Roman
fathers who exposed their newborn baby girls and boys,
probably later had sex with these sons or daughters at
brothels: “For
fathers, unmindful of children of theirs that have
been exposed, often without their knowledge, have
intercourse with a son that has debauched himself, and
daughters that are prostitutes; and license in lust
shows them to be the men that have begotten them.
These things your wise laws allow: people may sin
legally; and the execrable indulgence in pleasure they
call a thing indifferent.”
[12]

In
Roman times, many babies who were left abandoned in
the bush after their births, were picked up or sold to
brothel owners. When the babies became older, their
owners instructed them in being child prostitutes and
then adult prostitutes. Clement satirically attacked
these practices saying: “These things your wise laws allow…” and
adds that the Romans regarded these wicked practices
as ethically
“indifferent”.
[13] During Clement’s
time, most Romans tolerated men having sex with male
and female child prostitutes, even if these were
originally the men’s own children. The Romans were so
tolerant and “enlightened” that they opposed
homophobia and paedophiliaphobia.

A
Nobel Prize winner advocating Spartan, Roman and Nazi
murders

Another indication of
the step by step ethical decline in Western society
and spread of wicked ancient Greek and Roman-like
ends-justifies-the-means philosophies of many of the
ancient Greeks and Romans can be seen in the
following: Author Leonard Sweet records that recently
a Nobel Prize winner in the field of genetics
“proposed that children not be declared living
until three days after birth to give parents a
choice of destroying their ‘deformed’ children, who
are defined as devoid of ‘meaningful humanhood’.”
[14]

The above is a return
to the wicked murderous practices of the ancient
Spartan Greeks and of famous Roman doctors like
Soranus of Ephesus. The fact that the Swedish
institution which gives out Nobel prizes for peace,
medicine, physics, chemistry and literature could give
a prize to someone who advocated the murder of
millions of little children typifies the unbelievable
hypocrisy of many humanistic “do-gooders” in
our present Western world. These foolish individuals
think they can promote the causes of world peace by
behaving like Nazi mass-murderers removing unwanted
people from Earth.

Infanticide in Egypt in 1 B.C.

In the Oxyrhynchus
Papyri 744 written in 1 B.C., a man named Hilarion
from Oxyrhynchus in Egypt wrote to his wife Alis
insisting that she expose their new-born baby to death
if it was a girl: “I send you my warmest
greetings. I want you to know that we are still in
Alexandria. And please don’t worry if all the others
come home but I remain in Alexandria. I beg you and
entreat you to take care of the child and, if I
receive my pay soon, I will send it up to you. If you
have the baby before I return, if it is a boy, let it
live; if it is a girl, expose it. You sent a message
with Aphrodisias, ‘Don’t forget me.’ How can I forget
you? I beg you, then, not to worry.”
[15]

Infanticide in ancient Rome

In his Metamorphoses
9: 669-684 and 704-706, the Roman writer Ovid (43
B.C.-17 A.D.) recorded an example of infanticide in
ancient Rome: “Ligdus was a freeborn man,
but from a lower-class family. He was a poor man, but
moral and honorable. He told his pregnant wife, when
she was approaching labor, ‘I pray for two things –
that you may have an easy labor, and that you may bear
a male child. For a daughter is too burdensome, and we
just don’t have the money. I hate to say this, but if
you should bear a girl – I say this with great
reluctance, so please forgive me – if you should bear
a girl, we’ll have to kill her.’ He spoke the words,
and they both wept, he who had given the order and she
who must carry it out. And Telethusa begged her
husband over and over again to change his mind, but in
vain. His mind was made up…She went into labor and
gave birth to a girl.”

The ancient Etruscans did not murder their
newborns

In his “Deipnosophistae”,
the ancient writer Athenaeus stated that the ancient
historian Theopompus in the forty-third book of his
“Histories” recorded that the pagan Etruscans did not
kill any of their children after birth: “The
Etruscans rear all the babies that are born…”
[16]

The ancient Germans opposed abortion and
infanticide

In his writing “Germania”,
the Roman historian and consul Tacitus (approx 56-120
A.D.) records that the pagan tribes of Germany opposed
abortion and killing of newborns. He records that
among the Germans “…to limit the number of
their children, to make away with any of the later
children is held abominable and good habits have more
force with them than good laws elsewhere.”
[17]

In the above quote,
Tacitus compares the custom of the Germans to some of
the laws made by the Roman Emperor Augustus (reigned
27 B.C.-14 A.D.) which attempted to stop the killing
of newborns but which were ignored by many people
throughout the Roman Empire.

Deliberately starving new-born babies to death

Recently in the United
States, the practice of abortion has spread to doctors
and nurses killing physically handicapped babies after
their birth. Some American hospitals have been doing
this since the 1970’s. They murder the babies by
deliberately starving them to death or not giving them
necessary treatment. For example, a 1973 report in the
New England Journal of Medicine openly named a
hospital in the American state of Connecticut which
was killing babies in this way.
[18] This is similar to
what the ancient pagan Romans and Greeks did and what
the wicked dictator, Adolf Hitler commanded his Nazi
doctors to do.

140,000 annually and
96% of these are unwanted by their mothers

In 1996, the abortion
rate in Australia was 140,000 unborn babies a year.
[19] Proof that most
Australian women who are murdering their babies
through abortion are doing it for reasons other than
rape or dangers to their own or their babies’ health
are the following figures from South Australia. In
1975, 94.7% of abortions were done for supposed mental
problems, 0.2% for sexual assault and 3.2% for
diagnosed or possible physical health problems for the
mother or child.
[20] In 1976, 1977 and
1978, the supposed mental problems category rose to
96%. This mental problem category is just a fancy name
for those who do not want their unborn babies.

The murder of an unborn
7 month old baby

The April 13, 2004
edition of “The Bulletin” magazine in Australia
recorded the fact that in late January 2000, doctors
at Melbourne’s Royal Women’s Hospital killed an unborn
baby which was 32 weeks old. They did this even though
the Victorian Crimes Act at the time stated that it
was a criminal offence for anyone to kill an unborn
child over 28 weeks of age. This crime carried a
maximum penalty of 15 years in prison.

The doctors killed the
baby because the pregnant woman had threatened to
commit suicide if they did not abort the baby. She
threatened suicide after learning that her 7 month old
unborn baby suffered from the non-fatal abnormality of
dwarfism.

The Bulletin recorded
that the doctors suggested to the woman and her
husband that she give birth to the child and then give
it up for adoption. But the couple rejected this
option.

The Bulletin also
recorded: “Further, an internal hospital
inquiry, which has never been made public, found there
was some uncertainty in the diagnosis and that the
woman’s case notes were incomplete.

This case would normally have remained
confidential, except a staff member referred it to the
hospital’s adverse events committee. There were deep
ethical concerns among some staff at the hospital and
hospital management took the usual step of going
public. It suspended the three doctors involved and
referred the case to the state coroner. The hospital
said at the time it was unclear from the medical
records whether a lethal injection had been
administered to the baby before the birth was induced.

Then, two years ago, the state coroner’s office
ruled it did not have the jurisdiction to investigate
the termination because the baby had been born dead.
But the Bulletin has learnt the acting Victorian
government solicitor provided advice to the coroner
that his office did have jurisdiction over the case.”

The facts suggest the
probability that the three relevant doctors
deliberately did not complete the woman’s case notes
in order to cover-up what they did, the baby did
receive a lethal injection and the Victorian
government ordered their solicitor to advise the state
coroner not to investigate the killing of the baby.

The Bulletin also
recorded: “Later term abortion is performed
in major obstetrics hospitals around the country in
cases where serious foetal abnormality is present.”
This plus the fact that the Victorian State Government
has now allowed three doctors to kill a 7 month old
baby, who had no fatal abnormality and whose only
problem was dwarfism, shows:

a)The laws about moral and ethical matters in
Australia are increasingly being made on the basis of
fitting in with extreme exceptions whose
so-called “human rights” come before the general good
of society and/or the human rights of others. In this
case, the supposed “right” of the mother to kill her 7
month old baby who could have been adopted, was taken
as being a valid exception to a law protecting babies
over 28 weeks old. The baby’s right to live and to be
adopted were denied. As a result, this precedent means
other similar exceptions can be allowed until in the
end the law is changed so much that unborn babies up
to 40 weeks old can be murdered by doctors.

b)The whimpish Victorian State Government
permitted three doctors to set a new standard in
Australia. This new standard is that if a patient
threatens suicide if the doctors do not do what the
patient demands, the doctors must grant the patient’s
wishes. What a stupid standard!

It is wrong to make
wicked exceptions to laws and grant evil requests just
to prevent someone from committing suicide.

Imagine what might
happen in future times if the present watering down of
laws protecting unborn and newborn babies continues.
You might have numerous mixed-up women bringing their
say 3 to 12 week old healthy normal babies back to
hospitals saying, “If you do not kill these babies, I
will commit suicide. If you try to adopt them out, I
will still commit suicide.” If present trends
continue, state governments in Australia will legalise
infanticide or the murdering of newborns. This will
result in a return to ancient Greek and Roman wicked
practices.

c)The absolute hypocrisy of many political
parties in Australia today is evident in the fact that
they claim to be so concerned to protect the rights of
the disabled but then they permit three doctors to
murder a 7 month old baby with dwarfism.

Hypocritical modern standards about abortion

Section 20 “Child
murder – when child deemed born alive” in Part 3,
Division 1 of the Crimes Act 1900 of the state of New
South Wales in Australia reveals that the law in this
particular state does not accept that a child prior to
birth is a living human being:

“Child murder – when child deemed born alive

On the trial of a person for the murder of a child,
such child shall be held to have been born alive if it
has breathed, and has been wholly born into the world
whether it has had an independent circulation or not.”

This unscientific
foolish law has been operative in New South Wales
since 1900.

On the front page of
the September 25, 2002 edition of “The Daily
Telegraph” newspaper in Sydney in Australia, there was
a story which had the long title “Road rage killed
Renee Shields’ unborn baby but no one will be charged
because the law says he was NOT A HUMAN”.
[21] The story then
explained that the legal system in New South Wales
does not regard any unborn baby as a living child
because of the above-quoted law in Section 20 of the
Crimes Act.

This foolish law does
not recognise that an unborn baby of any age is a
human. As a result, if someone does a violent act
which causes the death of another person’s unborn baby
in the state of New South Wales, the violent person
cannot be charged with manslaughter or murder.

At the present time,
babies which are born prematurely at only 23 or 24
weeks can often survive in hospital. So even this
shows how foolish is the present law.

Some politicians have
proposed that the law in New South Wales must be
changed to ensure that if someone besides the baby’s
mother violently causes the baby to die, the offender
will be charged with manslaughter or murder. But if
this happens it will be blatant hypocrisy to
not also charge women who abort their unborn babies
with murder. You cannot define unborn babies as humans
in one context and just as sub-humans in other
contexts without being an absolute hypocrite.